Bridge of Spies

Dir: Steven Spielberg

2015

***

Bridge of Spies tells the intriguing story of James B. Donovan, an American lawyer who in 1957 was given the task of defending Rudolf Abel, a Russian Spy, found living and working in New York City. It's a compelling true story from the Cold War, full of unbelievable situations and thrilling repercussions, directed by the mighty Steven Spielberg, written by the brilliant Coen Brothers and starring Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance who won best supporting actor at a number of award ceremonies. It's got everything you could want from a Cold War political thriller, and yet, I was left feeling pretty underwhelmed. Tom Hanks' performance was good but I'm not sure he was the best choice of actor. Personally, I think the problem was that it was Tom Hanks in a Steven Spielberg film, rather than the best that he can be. Steven Spielberg films can almost be put into a genre of their own, they're always big films but there is always a Christmas card quality to them that doesn't always work. The direction is very striking, I just don't think it fit the story very well. There are far too many Spielbergisums for my liking, this distracts from the story and is becoming rather predictable from the director. An example. Tom Hanks' James B. Donovan sees people shot down trying to cross over the Berlin Wall from the window of a moving train. Later in the film, once he's back in the USA, he sees kids climbing over a fence in the back of someone's garden with pretty much the same composition. It's a great idea, both visually and as part of the bigger story but in Spielberg's hands it is forced and becomes somewhat of a tiresome exercise in forced emotional response, something that is a blight on Hollywood currently, created by the bearded one himself I'm afraid. Mark Rylance's performance was impressive but I'm not quite sure it was better than that of the other actors nominated in 2015. The sets were impressive but they looked a bit to new at certain times, it was also hard to tell if much of the background was CGI or not or if it just looked like it could be due to the Hallmark style hazy hue lens Spielberg seems to have adopted in his features. It may well be both but either way, I don't like it. The story should have been a noir full of contrast or a gritty life-like drama. Spielberg's big blockbuster treatment just doesn't fit the story, there is a lot to admire and indeed enjoy about the film, it's just that I believe that the story is so original it deserved to be handled with a less obvious approach.